Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
the real implementation within ecological restoration
projects of the already available scientific and tech-
nical knowledge. Concurrently, real-world projects
need to be better designed and managed so as to pro-
vide reliable data for further research and develop-
ment. Within an integrated CMR and sustainability
paradigm, social scientists, ecologists, engineers,
ecological economists and non-scientists of all sorts
must now pull together (i) to face up to the risks and
hazards of the 21st century, with its gigantic human
footprint and growing ecological overshoot, (ii) to fine-
tune our management of ecosystems and (iii) to repair
some of the most critical ecological and environmental
damage done in the past.
In Europe as elsewhere, ecological restoration has
no hope of being successful unless it respects the needs
of people and wildlife; that is, of the rest of nature
(Prescott-Allen 1991, Rosenzweig 2003). This position
- and the practical considerations it leads to - should
be considered and reformulated not only in strictly
biological, species-to-species terms, but also in eco-
logical, socio-economic and cultural terms as well. In
Europe, where socio-ecological systems predominate
(see Chapter 16), this point should also be relatively
easy to communicate, given that managed or human-
dominated landscapes and ecosystems have existed
there for so many centuries and human generations.
We must recognize however that the idea of a
dichotomy existing between people and nature is
deeply embedded in most cultures and will take time
to be modified and evolve into something new.
Growing recognition of the fact that ours is an era
of profound transformations characterized, among
other things, by a growing predominance of 'emerg-
ing ecosystems' (Milton 2003) and socio-economic
systems, may fasten and facilitate the kind of trans-
disciplinary collaborations that will be needed to face
the huge environmental and ecological challenges
ahead.
When natural-capital, emerging ecosystems and
socio-economic systems concepts are adopted, then,
as Carpenter et al. (2001) argue, we will see our way
to managing our life-supporting ecosystems 'from
the inside', as stewards of evolving systems to which
we belong and for which we are now fully respons-
ible. This way of thinking should also help contribute
to greater international cooperation, a sine qua non
of effective ecological restoration, and eco-economic
conservation and management of ecosystems. Case by
case, robust approaches to simultaneously addressing
eco-economic and environmental concerns must be
found (Costanza & Daly 1992, Prugh et al. 2003) while
new environmental laws and public policies will be
required. These measures and jurisprudence should
be designed to ensure application of the most equit-
able, appropriate and cost-effective means to protect
long-term, public interests, even while permitting
private commercial and industrial interests to operate
(Hawken et al. 1999, Heal 2000, Brown 2001, inter
alia). Indeed, it appears increasingly clear that private
enterprises have an important role to play in this arena
(Benfield et al. 2001, Cunningham 2002, Daily &
Ellison 2002), but governments will certainly need to
adjust taxes, penalties and incentives so as to con-
vince more corporations to assume their natural civic
leadership role.
In Chapter 16, we noted three primary reasons to
restore. While recognizing the validity of biodiversity
conservation and sustainable productivity as object-
ives, we argued for a re-orientation of ecological
restoration and, consequently, of restoration ecology
towards truly integrated, transdisciplinary efforts
aimed at the restoration of natural capital (Jurdant
et al. 1977, Costanza & Daly 1992, Cairns 1993,
Clewell 2000a, Milton et al. 2003). This enlarged
third answer to the question of why restore encom-
passes the first two reasons and also incorporates the
emerging notions of ecosystem health and integrity ,
especially in terms of resilience, self-organization
and biocomplexity. Ecosystem goods and services are
the dividends provided by a stock of natural capital
and, theoretically, they are best assured by systems
that are functioning in a healthy and sustainable
fashion, in the multifunctionallity senses of health,
integrity and sustainability, outlined above. Further-
more, along with Daly and Farley (2004), we note that
a profound conceptual paradigm shift is required at
societal levels, as related to the limits to growth, the
search for sustainability and natural capital as the
ultimate foundation of all economies and all societies.
The science of restoration ecology and the practice of
ecological restoration will undoubtedly be called upon
to play major roles in the coming decades as global
society comes of age and, hopefully, evolves nearer
to the ideas of sustainability and social justice; this,
indeed, is the new frontier.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search